Return-path: Received: from mail-qk0-f173.google.com ([209.85.220.173]:32954 "EHLO mail-qk0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932787AbdELJKl (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2017 05:10:41 -0400 Received: by mail-qk0-f173.google.com with SMTP id y201so42749937qka.0 for ; Fri, 12 May 2017 02:10:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: btcoex: replace init_timer with setup_timer To: Kalle Valo Cc: Xie Qirong , Franky Lin , Hante Meuleman , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20170512073555.12333-1-cheerx1994@gmail.com> <87tw4qqyh1.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> <87d1beqwtc.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> From: Arend van Spriel Message-ID: <036761ff-85a9-6042-57ed-ca3968550737@broadcom.com> (sfid-20170512_111117_966182_70317F57) Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 11:10:36 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87d1beqwtc.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 5/12/2017 10:54 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Arend van Spriel writes: > >> On 5/12/2017 10:19 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> Xie Qirong writes: >>> >>>> The combination of init_timer and setting up the data and function field >>>> manually is equivalent to calling setup_timer(). This is an api >>>> consolidation only and improves readability. >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel >>>> Signed-off-by: Xie Qirong >>>> --- >>>> >>>> setup_timer.cocci suggested the following improvement: >>>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/btcoex.c:383:1-11: Use >>>> setup_timer function for function on line 384. >>>> >>>> Patch was compile checked with: x86_64_defconfig + CONFIG_BRCMFMAC=y + >>>> CONFIG_BRCMFMAC_USB=y + CONFIG_BRCMFMAC_PCIE=y + CONFIG_BRCM_TRACING=y + >>>> CONFIG_BRCMDBG=y >>>> >>>> Kernel version: 4.11.0 (localversion-next is next-20170512) >>> >>> How is this different from the first version? >>> >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9709467/ >> >> Hi Kalle, >> >> This is actually the third version. You are referring to the >> not-specifically-named "v2" here, but how are you to know ;-) > > Exactly :) > >> This third version is the same as v1 on which I commented to put the >> coccinelle output in the commit message. So I would still keep v2 if >> nothing else changed in v3 apart from my Acked-by: tag. > > Ok, but I can easily take v3 (ie. this one) so that you get credit ;) If you add the coccinelle output in the commit message, ie. above the '---' that would be great. So for both you have to do additional stuff provided you find it useful to have the coccinelle output. :-p Regards, Arend